Gopal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan - Court Judgment |
| Criminal |
| Rajasthan High Court |
| Jan-23-1987 |
| S.B. Cr. Misc. IInd Bail App. No. 183 of 1987 |
| Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J. |
| 1987(1)WLN223 |
| Gopal and anr. |
| State of Rajasthan |
| Application allowed |
criminal procedure code - bail--two different versions of incident--held, bail application be accepted.;bail granted - - i have heard learned counsel for the accused petitioners as well as learned public prosecutor who is assisted by mr. ( will not like to express any opinion on merits of this case but taking into consideration the material on record without saying as to whether the names of saroj and anr. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court undertaking to appear before that court or any other courts on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so......consideration the material on record without saying as to whether the names of saroj and anr. has been rightly mentioned as eye witness or not as mr. rathore says that a complaint was made against that sho that these two witnesses are relations of the accused and in order to give benefit to the accused persons, their names have been introduced by eye witnesses, taking into consideration the fact that from the statements what so ever worth they are for the present it can be said that there are two different versions of the incident and therefore, i accept the bail application and direct that both the accused petitioners gopal and jagdish shall be released on bail provided each of them shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court undertaking to appear before that court or any other courts on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.
Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J.
I have heard learned Counsel for the accused petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor who is assisted by Mr. Rathore advocate for the complainant. ( will not like to express any opinion on merits of this case but taking into consideration the material on record without saying as to whether the names of Saroj and Anr. has been rightly mentioned as eye witness or not as Mr. Rathore says that a complaint was made against that SHO that these two witnesses are relations of the accused and in order to give benefit to the accused persons, their names have been introduced by eye witnesses, taking into consideration the fact that from the statements what so ever worth they are for the present it can be said that there are two different versions of the incident and therefore, I accept the bail application and direct that both the accused petitioners Gopal and Jagdish shall be released on bail provided each of them shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court undertaking to appear before that court or any other courts on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.